Abstract
Proactive behaviour is a self-starting, problem-solving and future-focused process. Employees with a high level of proactivity tend to be self-motivated and act in advance to change themselves or the environment around them in order to achieve their future goals. This cross-sectional study aims to examine the direct relationship between independent variables (can do and energised to proactive motivational state) and dependent variables (personal change and job crafting). Later, this study will also examine the relationship between interaction variables: role-breath self-efficacy X work design, role-breath self-efficacy X significant role change, high activated positive affect X work design, high activated positive affect X significant role change; and dependent variables: personal change and job crafting, to predict P-E fit. The data were collected from U.S. employees who currently experience work role changes, using a self-report survey (N = 333). The results from this study show that both can do and energised to proactive motivational states have no significant relationship with personal change, while interaction variables (role-breath self-efficacy X work design, role-breath self-efficacy X significant role change, high activated positive affect X work design, high activated positive affect X significant role change) are neither showing direct nor moderated effect were significant. This suggests that there was no association between personal change and work role changes (work design and significant role change). However, there were significant direct relationships between proactive motivation (can do and energised to) and job crafting, though, none of the moderated effects are significant. This provides some supports for Parker’s proactive model in a sense that can do and energised to proactive motivational state were positively predicted P-E fit on the “E” side (job crafting), but did not predict the “P” side (personal change). The results from this study has contributed some new knowledge on the relationship between proactive motivation (can do and energised to) and proactive behaviours (personal change and job crafting) when work role changes (work design and significant role change) were involved. Additionally, this study also suggest that more studies should examine the relationship between proactive motivation and proactive behaviours with different types of work role changes. As change is very common in today’s modern workplace, more evidence is needed to determine the outcomes of proactive behaviours associate to change.
